It's not just F12. On some systems it is Delete, Esc, or Ctl-Shift-S, and any number of other potential combinations of modifier and F-keys.

So your approach is actually the perfect one for hacking into an unfamiliar system :).

Mod parent up. This would be a really nice, sensible state of things that I could imagine being realistically being applied to many (but probably not all) standards bodies.

But even more pertinent is the question, why is the W3C allowed to put H.264 in the HTML5 spec? The whole premise of the web is that its specifications are open (i.e. royalty free), and that is one of the reasons it has become so popular. Have we learned nothing from GIF? Media formats that are specified as being embedded within HTML should be treated as if they are part of the HTML specification--a specification which is supposed to be royalty-free! Allowing H.264 in there is the epitome of saying one thing while doing another--pure hipocrasy!

Agreed.

You've got to be kidding. Never mind that it has taken years to get Theora where it is now technically -- it is also a fact that there are only so many ways to cut down on video bitrates. This is why, even though Theora is theoretically a "new" codec, it still allegedly could be called out for violating MPEG patents.

Yet another "new" codec, short of some magical new video compression algorithm being discovered (chances slim to none), wouldn't change anything in regards to legal issues, and would need years to mature technically to the point where it is ready for prime time.

There is no question that patent and copyright reform are desperately needed, and are the best solution. But since it seems like this won't happen anytime soon, the simplest solution would be for the MPEG-LA to change the licensing to something that prohibits themselves from changing their minds and extracting royalties at a later date. (Somewhat similarly to how the GPL ensures that a company can never backtrack on the open-sourceness of code.)

Or, even better, make a legally binding promise to give up all royalties, commercial included, at a fixed date in the future. Something like the following would make the masses happy methinks:
(however IANAL so I can't speak for accuracy, enforceability or realisticness of the language)

"Until (--insert date here--), MPEG-LA garantees the royalty-free use of (--insert MPEG specs here--) for non-commercial purposes. Directly following this date, said specifications are to be available royalty free for both commercial and non-commercial purposes, indefinitely. Starting on said date, no royalties shall be applicable or enforceable by any party on the specifications in their current form as of this writing ((--current date--)). This statement is binding under law and cannot be retracted."

As for the date, 2012 sounds good to me. :)

I don't about you, but I thoroughly enjoy using CDs and DVDs for storage, particularly of pictures, music, videos and applications. They fulfill the purpose wonderfully, as Bluray will (/might) when (/if) Bluray burners become standard equipment. The point is not to back up the entire hard drive; the point is to share information with others and/or back up enough of the hard drive, in sensible categorized chunks, at a cheaper price point and theoretically with a longer shelf life than what you get by buying a second hard drive.

I am rich
I deserv it
I am good,
healthy &
successful

Well the lack of tools is certainly a gap in the market that some party could cash in on right now with a pretty big payoff long-run.

This makes it look like GWT is becoming a candidate. Also based on some of the assertions made recently by Adobe in the vein of "we're in the creative tools business, not the technologies business" I think they may jump on board the HTML5 train soon as well.

Actually, in the case of Amtrak it's the exact reverse: privately owned infrastructure (the rails themselves) with a (semi-)public service running on top of it. And that's exactly why it's so f*$&ed up.

Buying paper plates is also an investment. An investment in employees--in their loyalty, in their work ethic: in short, an investment in the products they will be producing, which is an investment in customer confidence, which means customer loyalty, which means long-term payoff that you can't get with these kinds of marketshare-buyout tricks.

Quite honestly, I'd gladly give $2000 of my cash per year to the government if it meant I could count on getting health care, no matter what. $2000 is small potatoes compared to what one gets charged for even the most basic of hospital visits.... The fact that I'm also ensuring the welfare of others is just a moral icing on the cake.

Nice try there with the hypochondriac. But considering hypochondriacs make up maybe 1% of all patients who go to the hospital (a much greater percentage of people avoid hospital visits if at all possible), I really don't think they're a factor.

I think he means "not going anywhere" as in "here to stay". In other words he's agreeing with you.

But yeah, I read it the other way too the first time around.

My guess is that quite a few manufacturers will start producing these kinds of devices exclusively in the future... So basically they can give the finger to MS and its pressure politics...

In the article, no, but in the video the ARM head guy mentions "sub-$200" prices.

Admittedly I don't know what I'm talking about, but it seems to me that if you've done that many IQ tests, you ought to be getting a bit better each time....